February 3, 2012

This list of 11 potential candidates is horrifying — or hilarious, depending on how much you like Governor Scott Walker. I mean, Citizen Dave has the 11 in order, and #1 is Herb Kohl! Herb Kohl is a 76-year-old man who's retiring from the U.S. Senate after a quarter century (and very little to show for it). According to Dave, the great thing about Kohl is that he's very rich, so he can use his own money. Note the implied concession: People aren't going to want to make contributions to the other candidates. But, look, there are no donation limits in the recall election. If Kohl wants to dump his money into the election, he can hand it to whomever he wants.Maybe one of the other 10 characters on Dave's list. Maybe #6, Kathleen Falk, who is, you know, the only person on the list who's actually announced her/his candidacy.

ADDED: Here's the Government Accountability Boards memo about contributions for recall expenses. The exemption applies to money used "for the purpose of payment of legal fees and other expenses incurred in connection with the circulation, offer to file or filing, or with the response to the circulation, offer to file or filing, of a petition to recall an officer prior to the time a recall primary or election is ordered, or after that time if incurred in contesting or defending the order."

"Note the implied concession: People aren't going to want to make contributions to the other candidates"

Bullshit. It's because of Citizens United and the massive funding that will flow to Scott Walker and SUperPACs. Democrats, especially now, have a more difficulty raising money than Repubs. His money has always been a big part of Herb's apeal for Dems.

This election is national in impact and consequence. Walker has been scooping up dollars from plutocrats outside Wisconsin all over the country.

Regarding Herb Kohl: Very little to show for it is right. I really believed the obvious logic of "Nobody's senator but your own." Here he was, a successful businessman with all the money in the world, who was this nice, unpretentious guy who hung out at George Webb. What could go wrong with that?

Honestly, with all his years in the Senate, his most notable accomplishments are mismanaging the Bucks (but keeping them in town) and funding the majority of he Kohl Center.

>>Bullshit. It's because of Citizens United and the massive funding that will flow to Scott Walker and SUperPACs. Democrats, especially now, have a more difficulty raising money than Repubs. His money has always been a big part of Herb's apeal for Dems.<<

Aren't unions, public employee unions in particular, the ultimate SuperPACs?

Nobody of note wants to be the candidate for the obnoxious, petulant and entitled? A constituency that casually fired the Teacher of the Year because she did not have enough union tenure can't find a champion?

Nobody wants to be the vanquished embodiment of a Temper Tantrum? Nobody wants to have to spin "It's not over until we win" after yet another electoral defeat in the Walker era?

Kathleen Vinehout is my dark horse. Smart and personable. Educated. She has a PhD instead of being a college dropout. Plain talker. Great smile. A dairy farmer from Alma. [what's more Wisconsin than that??]

And she's not being dogged by that dreaded Don Ho! She doesn't have to answer that uncomfortable question: Who is Don Ho? What does Don Ho want from you? What's this all about?

Ditto James and Jay said. The claim that Citizens United is a a boon for Republicans conveniently ignores the roles of the unions, who have dumped enormous amounts of money into the political system, and the claim that Republicans raise more money is both counterfactual (see Obama, Barack) and based on a fundamentally erroneous and discredited premise (that the democrats are the party of the poor and the republicans are the party of the rich).

Garage, I'm watching Vinehout, too. I like that she's 'out-state' and rural. Kohl, beyond his money, brings a kind of unassuming calm (some would say, snore, and wouldn't necessarily disagree) and real business experience to the party. Either might be an antidote to the times we're in. We'll see.

"Bullshit. It's because of Citizens United and the massive funding that will flow to Scott Walker and SUperPACs. Democrats, especially now, have a more difficulty raising money than Repubs. His money has always been a big part of Herb's apeal for Dems."

It's not because of Citizens United. Are you really that uniformed?!

Citizens United is about spending one's own money independently of the candidate. Under the Wisconsin recall procedure, there are no limits on contributions.

So that's another reason why pursuing a recall was ill-considered. It is allowing people to give directly to Walker. This COULD be made illegal, even under Citizens United.

It was the recallers themselves who opened up the money sluices to Walker. They have themselves to blame for this, not the US Supreme Court.

Please acknowledge that you've read and understood this, because I would like you to withdraw your statement.

The question is more interesting than the answer. It presumes that "Democrats" are, in some sense, a sufficiently unified group sharing an organizational structure that allows the group to make process-decisions such allow the group to "line up" a viable candidate. But instead the Dems are even more fractured and structure-less than the Republicans. Chaos is much more the norm in such free-form groups than control, even if on occasion, enough of the interest-defined subgroups composing the whole can come together in a common effort.

Control requires, at a minimum, the ability of some sub-group to impose a process and enforce a result that allocate rewards and punishments among the members. If you think of it as an economic system, the ability to exercise control in the political group requires at least an oligopolistic structure, where some players exercise enough power to influence the allocation decisions within the market. Contemporary politics, Dem and Rep alike, is very far from that model -- much more like a classic free market where no individual or cohesive sub-group has sufficient power to direct the allocation decisions of the whole.

We are much closer to classical Athens than you might think. The exceptions were the big-city political machines that were once able to exercise the kind of control Ann's question posits. But they are mostly long gone.

It may be a strange way to run a country (state) but it's become the American way.

Kathleen Vinehout is my dark horse........ A dairy farmer from Alma. [what's more Wisconsin than that??]

As I recall, she was a professor in Illinois before she and her husband (an economist) moved to WI to reenact some "Green Acres" fantasy. She got a lot of attention because they chose to not buy health insurance and had to pay for some emergency health care out of pocket. In the meantime, despite not being able to purchase health insurance, she was able to loan $7,000 to her campaign. This is back in 2007.

Herb Kohl needs a new arena for his basketball team. He politically can't get the taxpayers to build one if he is governor....and he would piss off alot of people regarding that issue if he ran against Walker and lost.

(This state has recalled a senator for voting for funding Miller Park)

Althouse, to be clear, the unlimited donations can only occur from the time of the recall filing until "the time when an election is ordered and any legal appeals of that order are exhausted". So the clock is ticking.

garage, Vinehout is a VERY dark horse. She only has a tenuous grip on her own district. I've met her lots of times, and I don't think she has the star power to generate enough supporter enthusiasm for a governor run. Also, while you say her "out state" cred is a plus, I'd say the Madison partisans won't be happy unless the candidate is one of their own (under an umbrella that includes Milwaukee).

@Alpha Liberal: "Democrats, especially now, have a more difficulty raising money than Repubs. His money has always been a big part of Herb's apeal for Dems."

Besides agreeing with Ann, your also screwed because the Union Money spigot was turned off. They're no longer able to forcefully collect dues thru the state. Now libs have to put up their OWN MONEY, which we all know they don't have, or are willing to part with.

That's why Kohl is this guys pick. It's the laziest, cheapest pick that he doesn't have to pay for.

The only reason Vinehout won in 2010 is because her opponent, Ed Thompson, the most popular man in Wisconsin, announced he was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer -- a virtual death sentence -- during the campaign.

Kathleen Vinehout is just a tax and spend lefty. And not to bright or well spoken at that.

But then again the recallers think this is an election for the Governor of Madison, and will want a candidate to that end. They cannot comprehend that there is any other thought process other than their own liberal dementia.

Went over to the link - some interesting things to take out of context:

Quote: (Doug La Follette) - "we are those flakes"

Re: Kathleen Falk: Lingering lefty grumpiness for taking on Peg Lautenschlager. (That I do not get. Lautenschlager was the chief law enforcement officer in a state with the biggest drunk driving problem in the nation and she drove drunk. Kathleen was absolutely right to challenge her. It is beyond comprehension that Peg continues to have credibility with the left or any thinking person, for that matter.)

In comments section, Doug La Follette chimes in about correcting his name & looking at Meade's hilarious comment, I can see why that crowd hates him.

Need I remind you that this was largely a grass roots movement, not dominated by a few individuals, and as a result it did have to focus on campaigning for one person but instead could focus on protesting one person's misguided policy in Wisconsin. That in itself is an accomplishment that has already had an impact on Walker as seen in the State of the State address, and yes unfortunately it has helped Walker draw in the millions of dollars from a few out of state contributors. But even that move only severs to shows the special interests who back old dead eyes, and may end up working against him.

Well, actually, the comment was in the context of a political analysis and was not a personal attack.

You assume that the Professor's remarks are motivated by her gender, since, being a woman, she obviously cannot resist a snarky remark about another woman's appearance. How sexist! What fascist bastard you must be!

Need I remind you that this was largely a grass roots movement, not dominated by a few individuals, and as a result it did have to focus on campaigning for one person but instead could focus on protesting one person's misguided policy in Wisconsin.

To answer the question, it might have been nice. But, in California, as I remember, the Gray Davis recall proceeded separately from the Schwarzenegger campaign, and if I remember right, Schwarzenegger did not declare his candidacy until the recall was already either scheduled or well on its way.

Had he not rather whimsically decided to run, Davis either would have survived (barely), or he probably would have been replaced by his Democratic, and even more liberal. Lt. Governor, Cruz Bustamante, a big empty suit who got on the ballot to protect Democratic interests. The other viable candidates were Arriana Huffington and a conservative/libertarian, Tom McClintock, who is now in Congress. They would have probably each gotten enough votes to assure Bustamante would've gotten about 38 percent and won. Schwarzenegger, despite the all-out opposition of the LA Times, was able to combine his celebrity, money, and the perception that he was a moderate conservative who cared about education, to win. But, to repeat, his entry wasn't assured, and he wasn't involved in the recall up to the point where he filed papers to run.

The whole thing was really a protest against Davis, and while Republicans certainly backed it, it was more of a local talk radio-born movement with independent support. It was, one might suggest, almost a precursor of the Tea Party.

"Here's what Kathleen Vinehout looks and sounds like. What do you think? DId that seem gubernatorial?"

She looks, and sounds, like an elementary school principle who's happily trying to mollify the teachers' union.

Regardless, Democrats won't care. After proving time and time again (Torricelli, Obama, etc.) they have no reasonable standards for their candidates, they'll vote for whomever, including a dairy cow, it it where on the ballot.

I think Althouse is mistaken in her thinking that Walker's huge money advantage is a huge advantage. Half the state [or more] has already made up their mind. No amount of money is going to change that. He is going to be spending huge chunks of money for a small slice of the electorate.

No Democrat worth a damn is going to run, because they know they will lose. Its really that simple. Walker still has an approval rating around 50%. The Dems in Dane County seem to think everyone hates him, which of course isnt true if they would ever leave their Dane County bubble.

Its hysterical that the recallers got enough sigs to recall Scott Fitzgerald, yet nobody has the balls to run against him. He might be the first politician ever recalled that has to run without opposition. Talk about taxpayer money quality spent.

The fundraising exemption is more limited than I'd been portraying it.

Does that mean that Walker can't use most of the $14 million he has raised so far for election purposes, and instead he has been flying all over the country raising $$$ in order to mount legal challenges against the recall election?

If that is true then it sounds like he is pretty damn scared about actually winning the votes, so he wants to tie the whole process up in court for as long as possible.

-------Herb is well liked statewide, has all the name recognition in the world and could raise the money. (Very unlikely he would self fund, nor should he.)

Could he win? I don't know, but he's popular enough to have a shot.

Anyone who watched judiciary committee hearings knows that Herb is deep into his sunset years and was not able to formulate coherent thoughts in his questions. Anybody who wants this TWENTY FOUR YEAR veteran of the Senate -after a full business career near octogenarian to serve more stressful years in office is guilty of cruelty

------Does that mean that Walker can't use most of the $14 million he has raised so far for election purposes, and instead he has been flying all over the country raising $$$ in order to mount legal challenges against the recall election?

You must have missed the nightly television ads where Walker points out that he reduced a $ 3.6 billion dollar deficit without raising taxes and without cutting employees and teachers. He also mentions that state wide our property taxes didn't go up for the first time in years.

Here in Milwaukee we have those big digital billboards that have Walker ads too, about reducing the deficit.

So yeah, he's going to avoid running on issues and tie it up with legal challenges. LOL you break me up!!!!

"garage mahal said...I think Althouse is mistaken in her thinking that Walker's huge money advantage is a huge advantage. Half the state [or more] has already made up their mind. No amount of money is going to change that. He is going to be spending huge chunks of money for a small slice of the electorate."

Are you really this stupid? Much more than half have made up their mind...true. But ad buys and campaigning sway those that haven't and also affect turnout.